Archive for December, 2012

The philosophers German Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) and Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) had started to more place some details in the models of souls or the minds, becoming them then well more complex of he was obtained what it with racionalistas and empiristas of centuries XVII and XVIII. Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) crowned this way. With it, definitively we leave of side the image of ' ' eu' ' according to model of the modern thought. The psychoanalysis, with Freud to the front, said that ' ' eu' ' or same ' ' sujeito' ' , as the case? ' ' he was not Sir in its proper casa' '. ' ' ego' ' it would not have to be able of independent decision, exactly in its home, that is, in the mental field. They would coexist ' ' ego' ' other instances, whose forces would finish for giving to the last word in good part of the decisions and human acts. It was not treated more than seeing in them, when of our effective states of conflicts with we ourselves, under the fight ' ' reason versus paixo' '. Nor it was more the case only to speak in conflicts.

' ' eu' ' he had been recriado in order to have compartments, losing its homogeneity. The independent individual or the citizen had left to have a not problematic unit. The auto-transparency of ' ' eu' ' it was revoked. We, men women of century XX, we do not stop very to think if Freud was or not correct. Or better, until we made this, but such evaluation did not determine our theoretical choices. When we open the eyes, already we were all speaking as Freud taught in them. We incorporate our vocabulary a series of words of the psychoanalysis. We place in our language, exactly most common, the theories that had taken in them to an image well more complex of we ourselves of what that one produced in modernity.

' ' To understand as interlacement of contingencies they act in the production of a final consequncia, increases the possibilities of if elaborating planejamentos cultural adequate and efficient. The successful planejamentos in turn can become more efficient prevention of illnesses, educational molhorias in the transit, processes, processes politicians amongst other subjects that inside say respect to an one individual sociedade' ' (Alencar, E. 2008). From this explanation I better understand the importance, the power and the danger that only one person can have in a culture. The interlacement of contingencies really is white more to be studied therefore is what it finishes dictating as the group if holds and acts in the world. Answering of an individual turns a Sd (I stimulate Discriminativo) for another individual and thus a chain is formed that takes to a final consequncia that can be since the world-wide peace, until 3 World-wide War. Some souvenir of the film ' ' Borboleta&#039 effect; ' I find that this film illustrates accurately as the choices of a person intervene with another one individual creating chains of behaviors and events that take the disastrous consequncias and changing a choice, the dumb chain and the dumb consequncia drastically. Clearly that it is a film, only one fiction, but the content and the message is not.

It is the more positive message Thinking on the other hand, the metacontingncia can be a great allied in the production and organization of welfare inside of a culture, therefore they lead to a previsible and therefore controlable consequncia. An immediate one is necessary stiffener to induce another stiffener atrazado one. A successful example is the vaccination campaigns, therefore they are necessary operative behaviors of diverse professionals so that the campaign of certain. A perfect example of interlacement of contingencies controlled with previsible consequncia, an operative one of one individua server as I stimulate discriminativo for another person thus and if forms a chain of interlaced contingencies that lead positively to a stiffener, previsible and manipulable consequncia final. In the case immediate consequncia is the evitamento of one occasions of definitive atrazada illness and as consequncias the eradication of the same one in the future. Me it seems intelligent very the study of the functional relations between the contingencies and an only consequncia atrazada for all the operative ones interlaced. The metacontingncia concept one how much is in such a way complicated, but very logical one. We have the contingency as unit of analysis of the behavior of an individual and the Metacontingncia as unit of analysis of a culture formed for diverse individuals, each one with its contingencies if interlacing resulting in a final consequncia. I conclude that the form to understand and to manejar the culture and the group is without a doubt through the metacontingncia manipulating changeable and planning the desirable consequncias always aiming at the welfare and the advance of the quality of life of the group. Perhaps the reply for all the social problems are in the hand of the metacontingncias in the direction of terms an efficient instrument in the creation of social campaigns with reply cost favorable the stiffener immediate consequncia and the stiffener also been slow one. In this in case that, the instrument seems to be really promising.

As Matus Planejar is who has capacity to decide and the responsibility to lead, to execute the planned actions, with doniedade and coherence. One understands that who plans is who has commitment with project and when it is planned if it makes a calculation of (of) the situation (you are) that, it considers multiples scarce resources, that is, the inclementao possibility. Moreover, the planning mentions the gift to it and not to a drawing on the future. In the Matus truth it emphasizes the necessity of ‘ ‘ simular’ ‘ for the future poblema on which we plan, today to make possible thus a rational decision in the gift. The risk not to think about the future is of that it expresses the inefficacy of the decision that volume today. However the planning assumes a complex situacional calculation, that goes to precede and to preside over the concrete action. In this situacional planning, the actor analyzes the reality of inside of the situation.

Thus, the also multiple explanation and considers inside of itself, dimensions of reality and possibilities, the economy, the politics, the ideology etc. we cannot forget that the planning if relates to the chance and the real problems, situations that it requires resulted positive. What it is problem for an actor can be chance for another one. We are not alone in the social game. Therefore, it is very important to not only explain the reality as it perceives it to actor, but so that it tries to understand explanations of other actors, also different of its. For Matus, ‘ ‘ what it interests is that its explanation is the one moves that it to have a distinct plan of mine, and it takes it the action that me obstaculiza’ ‘. Without a doubt, the planning is non-separable of the management, is a form of organization for the action.